497.308
Wildlife holding and habitat removal permits; rules. (1) No person shall remove from
its natural habitat or acquire and hold in captivity any live wildlife in
violation of the wildlife laws or any rule adopted thereunder.
(2) The State
Fish and Wildlife Commission may adopt rules to carry out the provisions of
subsection (1) of this section that include but are not limited to:
(a) Providing for
the issuance and form of permits for the holding or removal from habitat of
wildlife.
(b) Prescribing
the wildlife species for which holding or habitat removal permits are required.
(c) Prescribing
the terms and conditions of holding wildlife and removing wildlife from habitat
to ensure the humane care and treatment of the wildlife.
(3) In adopting
rules authorized by subsection (2) of this section, the commission shall:
(a) Strive to
protect public health;
(b) Consider any
public health risks related to holding wildlife or transmitting zoonotic
disease, including any public health risks identified by the Oregon Health
Authority; and
(c) Consult with
the authority.
(4) No person to
whom a wildlife holding or removal from habitat permit has been issued shall
violate any of the terms or conditions thereof. [1973 c.723 §66; 2022 c.9 §9]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
6
cases, 2004–2015 · leading case:
State v. Slatton, 268 P.3d 556 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
State v. Slatton, 268 P.3d 556 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
· cites it 2× “catastrophe or other emergency; “(c) The theft is theft by receiving committed by buying, selling, borrowing or lending on the security of the property; “(d) The subject of the theft is a firearm or explosive; “(e) The subject of the theft is a livestock animal, a companion…”
State v. Couch, 103 P.3d 671 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).
“In addition, ORS 497.308 prohibits any person from removing wildlife from its natural habitat without a permit and authorizes the commission to prescribe the wildlife species for which holding or habitat removal permits are required.”
State v. Fujimoto, 338 P.3d 180 (Or. Ct. App. 2014).
“catastrophe or other emergency; “(c) The theft is theft by receiving committed by buying, selling, borrowing or lending on the security of the property, “(d) The subject of the theft is a firearm or explosive; “(e) The subject of the theft is a livestock animal, a companion…”
Filipetti v. Dep't of Fish & Wildlife, 197 P.3d 535 (Or. Ct. App. 2008).
“002 (prohibiting possession of wildlife in violation of wildlife laws or rules); ORS 497.308 (prohibiting acquiring and holding in captivity any live wildlife in violation of wildlife laws or rules); OAR 635-049-0010 (Fish and Wildlife Commission official policy opposing the…”
State v. Rocha, 225 P.3d 45 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
“catastrophe or other emergency; “(c) The theft is theft by receiving committed by buying, selling, borrowing or lending on the security of the property; “(d) The subject of the theft is a firearm or explosive; “(e) The subject of the theft is a livestock animal, a companion…”
Simpson v. Dep't of Fish & Wildlife, 255 P.3d 565 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
“May [petitioners] be prohibited, as a violation of the wildlife laws or of any rule promulgated pursuant thereto, from removing from its natural habitat or acquiring and holding in captivity their animals under ORS 497.308(1)? “6. Are [petitioners] required to obtain a wildlife…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 497.308(1) — 1 case
Simpson v. Dep't of Fish & Wildlife, 255 P.3d 565 (Or. Ct. App. 2011).
“May [petitioners] be prohibited, as a violation of the wildlife laws or of any rule promulgated pursuant thereto, from removing from its natural habitat or acquiring and holding in captivity their animals under ORS 497.308(1)? “6. Are [petitioners] required to obtain a wildlife…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 497.308(2)(c) — 2 cases
State v. Rocha, 225 P.3d 45 (Or. Ct. App. 2009).
“catastrophe or other emergency; “(c) The theft is theft by receiving committed by buying, selling, borrowing or lending on the security of the property; “(d) The subject of the theft is a firearm or explosive; “(e) The subject of the theft is a livestock animal, a companion…”
State v. Slatton, 268 P.3d 556 (Or. Ct. App. 2015).
“catastrophe or other emergency; “(c) The theft is theft by receiving committed by buying, selling, borrowing or lending on the security of the property; “(d) The subject of the theft is a firearm or explosive; “(e) The subject of the theft is a livestock animal, a companion…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.